April 15, 2017 at 12:55PM


Does it still make sense to buy EF-mount lenses

Well, how to start this?
I'm planning to buy a Sony Alpha 7s II und also want to get some nice lenses because the recent camera is a GH4 with some MFT glass.

What most people do is using their already existing EF glass they have bought in the old days of the 5D Mk II and Mk III and adapt it to the sony body.
So my main question is: Does it make sense to buy these lenses if you build up you gear from scratch?

Let's look at it objective:
The main lenses you would use are available in a E-mount version. F. e. the holy trinity. There is a 24-70 f/2.8 (2099€), a 70-200 f/2.8 (2699€) and a 16-35 f/4.0 (899€).
If you compare these with the canon versions plus an adaptor from metabones you would pay about the same amount of money.
But the sony lenses have image stabilization and a working auto focus which is great for stills but would not be usable at all if you would go with the adapter solution.

You could argue that in some day canon might make a DSLR-type camera that will fill your need that are filled now by the sony ones. But that isn't that likey if you look at the 5D Mk IV which is more expensive than the Sony cameras. Also the cine cameras from canon are much more expensive than the Sony ones that have also more and better features.
So is there any point buying EF type lenses if you don't use EF mount cameras and it's not likely that you will have one in the next 5-10 years?


There are many cine cameras that can use Canon EF lenses with or without an adapter. If you are going to ONLY shoot with Sony cameras and nothing else, then buying Sony might make the most sense.

Otherwise you can use Canon EF lenses with...
- Canon cameras ( 5D Mk3, C100, C300, etc... )
- Panasonic GH4, GH5, Varicam LT, etc...
- Blackmagic cameras ( Ursa Mini Pro is a pretty big deal in it's price range )
- RED cameras
- Sony cameras

Also, you can buy Sigma ART lenses with the Canon EF mount that perform well and cost less than Canon. ( they also have a range of Sigma cine lenses too )

April 15, 2017 at 9:52PM

Guy McLoughlin
Video Producer

If you can go all native then you should.
The metabones adapters are the best you can get, but still lag way behind native support for mounts.

Your autofocus will be MUCH faster as speed and accuracy is lost with an ef to e adapter. There is less change of a lens and body incompatibility causing an issue with your shoot.

If you can stay in the eco-system fs5,fs7 a7sII then you can be fine.

Plenty of people can give you the benefits of ef glass, so I can let them chime in.

Personally my primes are EF mount and the zooms are E mount, or multi-mount.

April 17, 2017 at 12:47PM, Edited April 17, 12:47PM


Native E-mount lenses also can't really be adapted to other mounts because of flange distance, whereas EF is pretty versatile. A lot of Sony lenses also have that stupid servo-focus.

October 5, 2017 at 1:52PM


There are times when using an adapter may cause lag in camera functions such as your cameras autofocus system. It will work better with the native lens but it is not always true there are adapters which are very great and will do the job. My suggestion would be if you will be upgrading in sony only then native lenses are the best choice for you if not the best choice is to buy the best adapter you can find. By reading what you are asking I am assuming you wont be buying an ef mount camera from canon so the best thing to do is buy native lens.

February 11, 2021 at 6:57AM, Edited February 11, 6:58AM

Arman Khan
Owner at The Black Light Studios Website

The newest BlackMagic pocket 6K pro still uses the EF mount so I would say, even 4 years after this boards post was written, yes it still makes sense to buy EF lenses.

February 23, 2021 at 11:41AM

Nick Straub

Your Comment